One cannot quarrel his curators for concurring with him in a deed which he omitted to revoke intra annos utiles.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Enterkin having insisted against his curators for damages and interest, as consenters with him in a deed, whereby he pretended to be enormly lesed, the curators' defence was, That he had not revoked or reduced the deed intra annos utiles; and as he could not now insist against the person in whose favours the deed was granted, neither against the curators, who consented to it.
Answered for Enterkin: He is not in an action of reduction against those who were benefiters by the deed in question, but in an actio directa tutelæ against his curators. These are different actions, having no connection or dependence one upon another; the one must be insisted in within the quadriennium utile, the other may any time within the long prescription.
Replied for the curators: Enterkin cannot quarrel them for concurring with him in a deed which he never revoked. The curators cannot be liable if he was not lesed; and if he has not revoked, the law presumes præsumptione juris et de jure, he was not lesed.
“The Lords found the curators not liable, Enterkin not having duly revoked and reduced intra annos utiles.
